Saturday, January 05, 2008

The "mob" --often called "the Mafia" --achieved mythic status in America thanks to movies, books, and the FBI. No expert on the mafia, I have in mind a rather simplistic Mafia business model --how it came about, how it grew, how it exploited "niche marketing". It's origins are usually traced to mid-nineteenth Century Sicily.

The Statue of Liberty greeted new arrivals with a promise of liberty. Many new immigrants, frankly, needed help. Many spoke little or no English and had equally limited job prospects. Many had families to feed. The character, Tateh, in E.L. Doctorow's Ragtime typifies a million stories. Ragtime paints the tragic picture of a promise broken. One of the film's most memorable scenes involved J. P. Morgan pontificating from a catwalk. Like today's GOP politicians he was holding forth about the American Dream. As a sea of immigrants reached out to him, the catwalk creaked and then collapsed. A desperate throng was crushed as they sought their dreams.

In some communities, in Sicily and in America, a godfather helped a new immigrant find a job or set up a business with small loans. He was often an advocate for the newly arrived. He offered them protection. At first, few regarded these men as criminals. They became, rather, role models and protectors. He filled the vaccum, offering protection when the "state" would not. Historian Paolo Pezzino wrote: "The Mafia is a kind of organized crime being active not only in several illegal fields, but also tending to exercise sovereignty functions – normally belonging to public authorities – over a specific territory..."

It was only the more odious practices that attracted the attention of government and prosecutors. Godfathers were shaking down small businesses, extorting money, collecting regular payments. No fair! Shaking down folk is the government's job!

Global ShakeDowns-R-Us: James Baker-Carlyle Group Government-guaranteed Global Corporate Fraud doesn't get any better than this. Acting as a special "debt" envoy to Iraq as well as a senior "advisor" to the Carlyle Group, James Baker, the Bush Family bagman, has been enlisted to strong-arm nations into forgiving Iraq's debt.

"Sir" James Baker, partner of Baker Botts, is also an equity partner in the notorious Carlyle Group, which is part of a consortium trying to collect $27 billion on behalf of Kuwait, one of Iraq's biggest creditors. How? By twisting the arms of Iraqi debt holders.

Countries like the U.K., which is owed $1 billion by Iraq, is being urged by Baker into "forgiving" this debt.

George Bush Jr. appointed Baker, the US Secretary of State under Bush Sr., as an "unpaid envoy" (read bagman-fixer) on Dec. 5, 2003. However since Baker is also an equity partner with a reported $180 million stake in the Carlyle Group, the conflict of interest is at once stark and undeniable.

Published in the Nation Magazine, Naomi Klein's article (thenation.)--Global ShakeDowns-R-Us: James Baker-Carlyle Group

URI DOWBENKO

Readers of The Shock Doctrine know that one of the most shameless examples of disaster capitalism has been the attempt to exploit the disastrous flooding of New Orleans to close down that city's public housing projects, some of the only affordable units in the city. Most of the buildings sustained minimal flood damage, but they happen to occupy valuable land that make for perfect condo developments and hotels.

The final showdown over New Orleans public housing is playing out in dramatic fashion right now. The conflict is a classic example of the "triple shock" formula at the core of the doctrine.

- First came the shock of the original disaster: the flood and the traumatic evacuation.

- Next came the "economic shock therapy": using the window of opportunity opened up by the first shock to push through a rapid-fire attack on the city's public services and spaces, most notably it's homes, schools and hospitals.

-Now we see that as residents of New Orleans try to resist these attacks, they are being met with a third shock: the shock of the police baton and the Taser gun, used on the bodies of protestors outside New Orleans City Hall yesterday.

Democracy Now! has been covering this fight all week, with amazing reports from filmmakers Jacquie Soohen and Rick Rowley (Rick was arrested in the crackdown). Watch residents react to the bulldozing of their homes here.

And footage from yesterday's police crackdown and Tasering of protestors inside and outside city hall here.

Friday, January 04, 2008

If you want to find a culprit, look among those who lie about the crime. Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf failed to provide security for Benazir Bhutto. Now --he's lying about Bhutto, his own role, and the so-called "lone lever" theory of her death.

Describing the ground ringed by numerous buildings as a "vulnerable place", Musharraf said: "This time she went of her volition, ignoring the threat." The President, who yesterday sought the help of Britain's Scotland Yard to probe Bhutto's death, ruled out the involvement of the country's military and intelligence agencies in the assassination.

"No intelligence agency of Pakistan is capable of motivating or indoctrinating a man to blow himself up," he said, adding one has to find out who gained the most from Bhutto's killing. "Would I and the government be the maximum gainer? Or is there someone else who could gain more?"

Clearly --Musharraf is trying to implicate the man who Musharraf said blew himself up. Clearly, the Pakistani Prime Minister has not read this blog, has not watched YouTube, nor any number of credible sources. Let's clear this up! Benazir Bhutto was not murdered by the man who blew himself up! She was not the victim of a "terrorist" attack! She was, rather, the victim of a professional hit. I saw at least one gunman on the video and saw at least two muzzle flashes. The explosion might as well have been on another planet but for the cover, the misdirection it might have provided the gunmen.

...the establishment media is already blaming Al-Qaeda for the assassination because ever since the attacks of 9/11 the media has blamed every government sponsored terrorist attack on this fictional organization. Al-Qaeda is nothing more than a front for government intelligence agencies that was originally formed in the 1970’s as a database of people who could be counted on to fight the Soviet Union’s occupation of Afghanistan. There have already been news reports mentioning how the Pakistani ISI has associations with Islamic extremists and members of al-Qaeda.

Musharraf's statement follows two previous and equally absurd cover stories: 1) that Bhutto was killed by the shrapnel from the blast; 2) that she died of wounds sustained when she banged her head on a lever, the "lone lever" theory! The "official theories" are inconsistent with one another and inconsistent with the video tapes of the event as it happened. Benazir Bhutto was shot to death. The primary suspects are those, like Musharraf, who are telling transparent lies designed to deflect suspicion and obstruct objective investigation. Having already failed to provide adequate security, Musharraf has done both.

Officialdom wasted no time in trying to pin the murder on al Qaeda. At this point, one must ask: which al Qaeda? Are we talking about the al Qaeda as envisioned by Colin Powell, George Bush, and Dick Cheney? That al Qaeda is a rag tag mob of Islamic extremists trained in the mountains by Osama bin Laden. But there is another, a real al Qaeda, a "base", specifically a CIA database.

The intelligence service of Pakistan, a crucial American ally in the war on terrorism, has had an indirect but longstanding relationship with Al Qaeda, turning a blind eye for years to the growing ties between Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, according to American officials.

The intelligence service even used Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan to train covert operatives for use in a war of terror against India, the Americans say.

The intelligence service, known as Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI , also maintained direct links to guerrillas fighting in the disputed territory of Kashmir on Pakistan's border with India, the officials said.Pakistani Intelligence Had Ties To al Qaeda, US Officials Say

Clearly, Bhutto posed a threat not only to Musharraf but to western imperial powers to whom he is dependent and indebted. The Bush administration!

Bhutto's edited remarks have caused a bit of a stir of late. In a BBC interview --edited by the BBC --Bhutto stated that Osama bin Laden was dead, a statement that strikes at the very heart of George W. Bush's "war on terrorism". Recently, however, some have said that it no longer matters whether bin Laden is alive or dead.

But --it does matter. Truth always matters especially when it strikes at the very heart of "officialdom" propped up by lies and propaganda. Osama was, after all, the Bush administration's poster boy for world wide terrorism.

Bhutto’s claim that Bin Laden is dead may very well be true. Several MSM outlets have reported precisely that, and, inexplicably they have been ignored. The best example is the FOX report of Dec 2001, for example. All but ignored until recently —-even by Fox. The New York Times reported in 2002 that Bin Laden was dead and has apparently re-discovered their story. As of yesterday, it had been republished on the NYT web site.

My own opinion is that Bin Laden had been long dead by the time a "tape" surfaced just prior to the 2004 elections. Many believe the tape was faked. Whoever faked that tape had a dog in the race --George W. Bush! Qui Bono? George W. Bush? Who had lied most loudly, most vehemently and most often about "terrorism". George W. Bush! Again --if you want to find a culprit, look first at those who lie about the crime. Who lies? Bush. Qui Bono? Bush. Who is compromised? Certainly, the release of what is most certainly a "fake Osama" benefited one who presumes to rule by decree. George W. Bush.

Conspiracy theories, moreover, are most vociferously denounced by conspirators. The only world wide conspiracy that we are supposed to believe in is the one that has been promoted most vociferously by George W. Bush, Dick Cheney et al. What is al Qaeda, if not a conspiracy?

In the meantime, check Findlaw or the Cornell Law School library. Search for SCOTUS or Federal Court decisions having to do with ’conspiracies’. That’s a helluva lot of ink, time, and labor about something that does not exist. What is al Qaeda if not a conspiracy? What is an Islamcist radicalism, if not a conspiracy? Certainly --the GOP does believe in conspiracy theories. They believe and have a religious-like faith in many worldwide conspiracies of anti-war hippies, secular humanists, pornographers, liberals, feminists, academics, environmentalists, baby killers, and --during the Nixon years --nattering nabobs of negativism. The GOP leadership is a conspiracy of liars, graft-takers, and co-conspirators in the Military/Industrial complex, itself a conspiracy best described by St. Thomas More:

So God help me, I can perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men procuring their own commodities under the name and title of the commonwealth.

They invent and devise all means and crafts, first how to keep safely, without fear of losing, that they have unjustly gathered together, and next how to hire and abuse the work and labour of the poor for as little money as may be.

The conspiracy described by More is as accurate today as a description of the Military/Industrial complex and the web of robber barons that comprised the GOP base. Of course, the GOP has a stake in making sure you don't believe the truth about them. If they truth were know about their party, a Republican candidate might never, ever get elected.

Thursday, January 03, 2008

The Bush administration, it seems, has kept Bin Laden alive for about seven years now, despite reports by the Fox news network that the alleged terrorist mastermind has been dead for years. On December 26, 2001, the Fox network reported that Osama bin Laden died of "serious lung complications" in mid-December of that year. If so, it means that Benazir Bhutto was correct to say that bin Laden is dead but it does not mean that she misspoke when she said that bin Laden had been murdered. The original Fox report is as follows:

Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader.

"The Coalition troops are engaged in a mad search operation but they would never be able to fulfill their cherished goal of getting Usama alive or dead," the source said.

Bin Laden, according to the source, was suffering from a serious lung complication and succumbed to the disease in mid-December, in the vicinity of the Tora Bora mountains. The source claimed that bin Laden was laid to rest honorably in his last abode and his grave was made as per his Wahabi belief.

About 30 close associates of bin Laden in Al Qaeda, including his most trusted and personal bodyguards, his family members and some "Taliban friends," attended the funeral rites. A volley of bullets was also fired to pay final tribute to the "great leader."

The Taliban source who claims to have seen bin Laden's face before burial said "he looked pale ... but calm, relaxed and confident."

Asked whether bin Laden had any feelings of remorse before death, the source vehemently said "no." Instead, he said, bin Laden was proud that he succeeded in his mission of igniting awareness amongst Muslims about hegemonistic designs and conspiracies of "pagans" against Islam. Bin Laden, he said, held the view that the sacrifice of a few hundred people in Afghanistan was nothing, as those who laid their lives in creating an atmosphere of resistance will be adequately rewarded by Almighty Allah.

When asked where bin Laden was buried, the source said, "I am sure that like other places in Tora Bora, that particular place too must have vanished."

If Fox was correct, then Bin Laden could not have issued a video tape of October 29, 2004 --just two days before the US election. It was a tape that many pollsters and pundits believe swung the election to George W. Bush over John Kerry.

On October 29, 2004, two days before the US elections, the Arab television network al-Jazeera sprung an October Surprise by broadcasting a videotape of a healthy looking bin Laden addressing the people of the United States in which he took responsibility for the September 11, 2001 attacks. He also condemned the Bush government's response to the attacks, and presented the attacks as part of a campaign of revenge and deterrence begun after personally seeing the destruction of the Lebanese Civil War in 1982. See 2004 Osama bin Laden video.President Bush opened up a six-point lead over John Kerry in the first opinion poll to include sampling taken after the videotape was broadcast. [21] Walter Cronkite found the video very convenient for the Bush administration, and said of it “I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing.” [22]

Not only Fox, but the New York Times also reported the death of Bin Laden.

Osama bin Laden is dead. The news first came from sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan almost six months ago: the fugitive died in December [2001] and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan. Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, echoed the information. The remnants of Osama's gang, however, have mostly stayed silent, either to keep Osama's ghost alive or because they have no means of communication. Click for full sized imageWith an ego the size of Mount Everest, Osama bin Laden would not have, could not have, remained silent for so long if he were still alive. He always liked to take credit even for things he had nothing to do with. Would he remain silent for nine months and not trumpet his own survival?

NYT has apparently re-published the story. The original publication date was: July 11, 2002. Fox, it would appear, scooped the NYT but, apparently forgot what they had reported.

The issue of bin Laden's pulse surfaced recently when the venerable BBC clearly censored remarks by Benazir Bhutto to the effect that bin Laden had been murdered. It still fair to ask why the BBC would have deleted only that portion of the interview. Following is the original, unedited version in which Bhutto states that Bin Laden had been murdered.

A fallacious rationalization has surfaced: Bhutto misspoke, that she had meant to say "Daniel Perle". There is absolutely no logical reason to believe that Bhutto misspoke. She did not pause. She did not struggle to find a name. Secondly, only an idiot would mistake Bin Laden for Perle. Bhutto is not an idiot. Even if Bin Laden were alive, it would not prove that Bhutto misspoke, only that she was wrong. Not the same thing. In fact, Bhutto was probably correct that Bin Laden is dead but wrong about the cause of death.

Wednesday, January 02, 2008

If Benazir Bhutto was correct then Bin Laden is dead. If Bin Laden is dead, he can't make tapes. If Bin Laden is dead, everything the US government has said about bin Laden is either wrong, mistaken, or, most probably, a bald-faced lie. If Bin Laden is dead, then everything Bush has been telling you about the war on terrorism over several years is either wrong or a lie or both. In any case, there was never any hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the events of 911!

If Binny can't make tapes, Bush cannot exploit them to wage a "war" about which he has never told the truth.

A few hours after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Bush administration concluded without supporting evidence, that "Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organisation were prime suspects". CIA Director George Tenet stated that bin Laden has the capacity to plan ``multiple attacks with little or no warning.'' Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks "an act of war" and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would "make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them". Former CIA Director James Woolsey pointed his finger at "state sponsorship," implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, "I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution."

Meanwhile, parroting official statements, the Western media mantra has approved the launching of "punitive actions" directed against civilian targets in the Middle East. In the words of William Saffire writing in the New York Times: "When we reasonably determine our attackers' bases and camps, we must pulverize them -- minimizing but accepting the risk of collateral damage" -- and act overtly or covertly to destabilize terror's national hosts".

The news that Bin Laden is dead is an inconvenient truth. The Bush administration had much more than money invested in Bin Laden. Bushco had built around Osama an "evil empire" worthy of a James Bond film --The World is Not Enough, the story of oil, intrigue and pipelines.

Sir Robert King, a British oil tycoon and close friend of M, is killed by a bomb attack inside MI6 Headquarters. The assassin was working under orders from Renard, an international terrorist who survived an assassination attempt by 009 and is continually gaining strength as the bullet eliminates his senses of pain and touch before inevitably killing him. James Bond uses an unfinished Q Boat created by his ally Q and chases the killer until she commits suicide.

M assigns to protect King's daughter, Elektra; Renard previously abducted and held Elektra for ransom, and it is believed that he has once again targeted her. Elektra assumes control of her father's business at a pivotal time, overseeing construction of an oil pipeline that would travel through the Caucasus, from the Caspian Sea to Turkey.

The non-fiction version was already afoot even as the motion picture moguls were writing the script for The World is Not Enough.

Despite complex geopolitics and considerable risks, major oil companies have been acquiring development rights and preparing for production since the early 1990s. Offshore drilling operations are underway in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, and are set to commence elsewhere.

The majors have also invested significantly in the future construction of oil and gas pipelines to distant ports and refineries. By 2010, they expect to invest at least $50 billion in production and transportation.

The first big move was a joint venture between Chevron and Kazakhstan, signed in 1993 to develop the huge Tenzig oil field on the Caspian coast. Three years later, ExxonMobil purchased a 25 percent share. Another consortium focused on Azerbaijan’s offshore fields, with estimated reserves of 32 billion barrels of oil and 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, making it the third largest potential regional source.

In 1994, BP Amoco, Lukoil, Unocal, Penzoil, Statoil, and others joined with Azerbaijan’s state oil company to form the Azerbaijan International Operating Company. Bush family adviser James A. Baker III, who spearheaded George W. Bush’s victory in the Florida election dispute, headed the law firm representing this consortium and sat on the U.S.-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce advisory council, as did Vice Pres. Dick Cheney before him. But before their investments could produce profits, roadblocks would have to be removed. The biggest was how to get the fuel to markets.

Prior to 9/11, the U.S. government’s preferred future route, known as the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) project, went from Azerbaijan through Georgia and then south to the Turkish coast. The goal was to reduce reliance on Russia and bring the southern Caucasus into the U.S. fold. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is a former director of Chevron, a lynchpin of the BTC consortium with extensive operations in Azerbaijan. Until 2000, Cheney was chief executive at Halliburton Co., named a finalist in 2001 to bid on engineering work in the Turkish sector.

Early on, it was easy to conclude that the real beneficiaries of a US adventure in Afghanistan would be the big oil consortium that had planned the pipeline across Afghanistan. In 1995, UNOCAL had apparently concluded a deal with Turkmenistan. Members of the Taliban met in the Houston suburb of Sugarland.

A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan.

A spokesman for the company, Unocal, said the Taleban were expected to spend several days at the company's headquarters in Sugarland, Texas.

Unocal says it has agreements both with Turkmenistan to sell its gas and with Pakistan to buy it.

[ image: The Afghan economy has been devasted by 20 years of civil war] The Afghan economy has been devasted by 20 years of civil war

But, despite the civil war in Afghanistan, Unocal has been in competition with an Argentinian firm, Bridas, to actually construct the pipeline.

Last month, the Argentinian firm, Bridas, announced that it was close to signing a two-billion dollar deal to build the pipeline, which would carry gas 1,300 kilometres from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, across Afghanistan.

In May, Taleban-controlled radio in Kabul said a visiting delegation from an Argentinian company had announced that pipeline construction would start "soon".

All would not go smoothly; Pakistan and Ahmed Shah Massoud's government in Afghanistan, meanwhile, had already signed a pipeline deal with an Argentinean company.

BBC - American government told other governments about Afghan invasion IN JULY 2001.

The wider objective was to oust the Taleban

By the BBC's George Arney

A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks. Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

Mr Naik said US officials told him of the plan at a UN-sponsored international contact group on Afghanistan which took place in Berlin. Mr Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.

The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to topple the Taleban regime and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place - possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan King Zahir Shah. Mr Naik was told that Washington would launch its operation from bases in Tajikistan, where American advisers were already in place.

He was told that Uzbekistan would also participate in the operation and that 17,000 Russian troops were on standby. Mr Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.

He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks. And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban.

By July, 2001, the US State Department was reported to have been threatening the Taliban with carpet bombs.

U.S. Policy Towards Taliban Influenced by Oil

By Julio Godoy, Inter Press Service

PARIS, Nov 15 (IPS) - Under the influence of U.S. oil companies, the government of George W. Bush initially blocked U.S. secret service investigations on terrorism, while it bargained with the Taliban the delivery of Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid, two French intelligence analysts claim.

In the book ''Bin Laden, la verité interdite'' (''Bin Laden, the forbidden truth''), that appeared in Paris on Wednesday, the authors, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, reveal that the Federal Bureau of Investigation's deputy director John O'Neill resigned in July in protest over the obstruction.

Brisard claim O'Neill told them that ''the main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it''. [emphasis mine, EC]

The two claim the U.S. government's main objective in Afghanistan was to consolidate the position of the Taliban regime to obtain access to the oil and gas reserves in Central Asia.

They affirm that until August, the U.S. government saw the Taliban regime ''as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia'', from the rich oilfields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean.

Until now, says the book, ''the oil and gas reserves of Central Asia have been controlled by Russia. The Bush government wanted to change all that''.

But, confronted with Taliban's refusal to accept U.S. conditions, ''this rationale of energy security changed into a military one'', the authors claim.

''At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs','' Brisard said in an interview in Paris.

According to the book, the government of Bush began to negotiate with the Taliban immediately after coming into power in February. U.S. and Taliban diplomatic representatives met several times in Washington, Berlin and Islamabad.

To polish their image in the United States, the Taliban even employed a U.S. expert on public relations, Laila Helms. The authors claim that Helms is also an expert in the works of U.S. secret services, for her uncle, Richard Helms, is a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

The negotiations with the Taliban broke down. In that summer of 2001, the American people were distracted by the American media noise machine. See: All Condit All The Time". The US Government was informing other governments that the US would be at war in Afghanistan no later than October. The US timetable for war was set before 911 would conveniently provide the pretext. Pure luck? I don't think so.

Thoughtful folk were demonized for daring to raise the issue: how fortuitous, how convenient for Bush that Bin Laden would organize one of the most outrageous, the most unbelievable conspiracies in world history! Bin Laden would recruit and arrange to train a rag tag bunch of "terrorists". They would all but flunk lessons in how to fly puddle jumpers but would hone their airliner skills in a coin-operated simulator.

Nevermind the question of how they got on board airliners without showing up on flight manifests! Let's give the liar in the White House the benefit of the doubt. Nevermind that wreckage from four planes completely disappeared --the first and only time in history that such an improbable and incredible thing had ever happened outside David Copperfield's magic show. Nevermind that the space shuttle, by contrast, entered the stratosphere at speeds up to 10,000 miles per hour yet failed to pop through a wormhole into another dimension. Unlike Flight 77 which left not a trace, the Space Shuttle Columbia left wreckage and identifiable human body parts strewn over three states.

The only time in history that four planes completely vanished was on 911. How convenient for Bush!

How convenient for Bush that just when he is planning to invade and/or carpet bomb another country, he is given a pretext on a plate! How convenient for Bush that a "terrorist" attack occurs that could be pinned on Bin Laden!

How inconvenient it is for Bush now that Bin Laden has been dead for several years! How inconvenient for Bush that he cannot credibly roll out another fake tape with which to scare the beejeebers out of gullible Americans!